Currently, Cisco UCS Director is unable to integrate with another product or with a server from another brand. If Cisco UCS Director is able to integrate with another product or with a server from another brand, then it would be great from a management perspective.
CEO at a energy/utilities company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 20
2023-04-13T14:06:00Z
Apr 13, 2023
There is a lack of information and clarity. We need to invest a lot of time and effort in gathering information about the entire system, including its network components. The tool should be a lot more intuitive and make it easy for us to understand and migrate.
There are a lot of bugs in the solution. This is an area in the solution that can be improved. So, one may face errors while dealing with the process in the solution.
Lead Software Engineer-Cloud Development at Thomson Reuters
Real User
Top 5
2022-12-12T15:45:09Z
Dec 12, 2022
The areas where this product can be improved are the integrations and the UI. These features are not as friendly compared to VMware products. This is because the UI has been a bottleneck, especially when working on complex workflows. The Cisco UCS Director does not provide some of the capabilities of the UI that VMware provides. We also found a gap in the version controlling the code that goes into the UCS Director at the time. Version control has been a problem. The one feature I would like to add in the next release is to make it more user-friendly in terms of the UI. Although there's a lot of effort in coding, it could have given a better UI and a better version control system.
System Architect at COMPASS IT Solutions & Services Pvt.Ltd.
Real User
2020-02-16T08:27:31Z
Feb 16, 2020
Normally, UCS Director is used primarily for orchestration, but when we look at a non-Cisco data infrastructure components, the UCS Director needs a bit more improvement in terms of integration with third-party systems and with existing older systems. I feel that more development or a more integrated road map should be set up so that it becomes a common platform for any infrastructure. In the next release of this solution, I would like to see changes in the navigation controls of UCS Director. That would be helpful. Modifying the icons that are available for use, as well as virtualization aspects.
Associate Director, Technology Architecture at a financial services firm with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
2019-10-15T05:01:00Z
Oct 15, 2019
HyperFlex is not the best of the hyper-converged solutions. We cannot depend on this solution to manage all of the data center's infrastructure. We can count on it to replace the traditional Blades or rack-mounted servers, but not a hyper-converged system. Adding integration, or an API to manage another vendor's hardware, would really add value to this solution.
The scalability of this solution needs to be improved because as it is now, you cannot scale the storage alone. Rather, you have to scale the storage and the compute together. I would like to be able to add more storage, and not be tied to upgrading anything other than storage alone. I would like to see more integration with other solutions.
Senior Manager Infrastructure Engineer at Open Text
Vendor
2019-07-02T06:57:00Z
Jul 2, 2019
The user interface could use improvement. UCS director tries to do just about everything, which means the user interface can get a bit cumbersome if you don't know what you're looking for or know where to find it. It can be really difficult. Simplifying the user interface would go a long way to making it more usable.
The solution could be improved is including a feature where I could do things programmatically versus having to create workarounds to get what I want to get done. Any more features would be welcome. They should keep developing API.
Currently, Cisco UCS Director is unable to integrate with another product or with a server from another brand. If Cisco UCS Director is able to integrate with another product or with a server from another brand, then it would be great from a management perspective.
The configuration server lacks in certain areas and needs improvement.
There is a lack of information and clarity. We need to invest a lot of time and effort in gathering information about the entire system, including its network components. The tool should be a lot more intuitive and make it easy for us to understand and migrate.
There are a lot of bugs in the solution. This is an area in the solution that can be improved. So, one may face errors while dealing with the process in the solution.
The areas where this product can be improved are the integrations and the UI. These features are not as friendly compared to VMware products. This is because the UI has been a bottleneck, especially when working on complex workflows. The Cisco UCS Director does not provide some of the capabilities of the UI that VMware provides. We also found a gap in the version controlling the code that goes into the UCS Director at the time. Version control has been a problem. The one feature I would like to add in the next release is to make it more user-friendly in terms of the UI. Although there's a lot of effort in coding, it could have given a better UI and a better version control system.
There could be an improvement with the integration with the newest solutions from other vendors' technologies.
I would like to see more flexibility when it comes to managing other stacks, like VMware virtualization.
Normally, UCS Director is used primarily for orchestration, but when we look at a non-Cisco data infrastructure components, the UCS Director needs a bit more improvement in terms of integration with third-party systems and with existing older systems. I feel that more development or a more integrated road map should be set up so that it becomes a common platform for any infrastructure. In the next release of this solution, I would like to see changes in the navigation controls of UCS Director. That would be helpful. Modifying the icons that are available for use, as well as virtualization aspects.
HyperFlex is not the best of the hyper-converged solutions. We cannot depend on this solution to manage all of the data center's infrastructure. We can count on it to replace the traditional Blades or rack-mounted servers, but not a hyper-converged system. Adding integration, or an API to manage another vendor's hardware, would really add value to this solution.
The scalability of this solution needs to be improved because as it is now, you cannot scale the storage alone. Rather, you have to scale the storage and the compute together. I would like to be able to add more storage, and not be tied to upgrading anything other than storage alone. I would like to see more integration with other solutions.
The user interface could use improvement. UCS director tries to do just about everything, which means the user interface can get a bit cumbersome if you don't know what you're looking for or know where to find it. It can be really difficult. Simplifying the user interface would go a long way to making it more usable.
The solution could be improved is including a feature where I could do things programmatically versus having to create workarounds to get what I want to get done. Any more features would be welcome. They should keep developing API.